Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

Ancient and ArchaeologyΒ  permalink

Ancient bridges - or how did they get to the other side then?

• Message 1.Β 

  Posted by priscilla (U1793779) on Tuesday, 9th June 2009

  Stirred to google up a source of information on ancient bridges - by that I mean pre Roman, I failed to find an interesting source of information. Direction would be appreciated.
  
  Fords and causeways served for the most part I assume. However, broad rivers - now contained by banks - probably spread far wider than today - that is my supposition - and made river crossing more pssible without bridges. Is there much evidence of ancient ferry systems in use?
  
  Regards, P.

  Link to this forum: Ancient bridges - or how did they get to the other side then?

  Report message1

• Message 2

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Tuesday, 9th June 2009

  Three bronze age boats have been excavated on the North bank of the Humber at North Ferriby.

  Link to this forum: Ancient bridges - or how did they get to the other side then?

  Report message2

• Message 3

  , in reply to message 2.

  Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Tuesday, 9th June 2009

  Who would want to build a bridge when there wasn't even any proper road? Usually back then rivers defined the borders of one's local community, very often the state itself.
  
  Most societies back then found bridges of little use. Commerce was carried on on the river itself not... over it!!! If anyone wanted to cross the river it would usually cost him next to nothing to pass using any local boatmen who if not professional could do it even for free.
  
  In Greece where people did things 10 times more complicated than building bridges, they were not into that sport since the landscape had very small rivers (if you see the biggest, river Axios, you will laugh) that could be easily passed - in the summer on foot too! The landscape dictated that there was little use for roads too as the bulk of the transportation of men and products was carried out by sea. Mountaines were only for the shepherds and shepherds did not need bridges.
  
  It was the Roman Empire and their fixation on land transportation that provided for a development in that sector. Technologies were already existing (the famous arc is no big idea to imagine), however the discovery of cement in those times aided a lot their construction.

  Link to this forum: Ancient bridges - or how did they get to the other side then?

  Report message3

• Message 4

  , in reply to message 3.

  Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Wednesday, 10th June 2009

  For once I have to more or less agree with E Nik. Before the Romans, people travelling long distances tended to use seas and rivers to get around. Iampretty sure that the remains of neolithic canoes have been found in several places along the River Tay.
  
  People certainly crossed rivers, of course. Ancient accoutns frequently tell of tribe smigrarting, but they probably didn't build bridges for such one off events.
  
  Having said that, I believe that ther eis at least oen example of an ancient wooden roadway in Ireland which corssed moors and bogs. Whetehr this counts as a bridge is debatable, but there is, I think, soem place in England where posts have been found which could have supported a trackway of sorts over some low lying maarshes. This, though, could have been for religious purposes as much for transport, a walkway to allow people to go out over the water so that they could throw in offerings to the gods.
  
  There is, though, the question of how the Iron Age Britons, for example, could cross rivers with their chariots. Not impossible if there was a ford, but perhaps they did build bridges over some rivers. The problem is, they would have built in wood, not in stone, so the remains are unlikely to have survived.

  Link to this forum: Ancient bridges - or how did they get to the other side then?

  Report message4

• Message 5

  , in reply to message 3.

  Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Wednesday, 10th June 2009

  The ancient Greeks may have been content to get their underpants wet every time they crossed water, but other Europeans of the day were a little more civilised in that regard (or at least drier), and built bridges, sometimes of impressive breadth and span. Archaeology has discovered Iron Age remains of timber bridges, most notably at La Tene in Switzerland - where discovery of the bridges initially was quite literally what "led" archaeologists to the further important discoveries on the site which created a whole new classification of contemporary European culture. Other similar timber foundations have been found in Hungary and France.
  
  Speaking of France - Caesar seems to have taken for granted that he would find bridges in Gaul. He famously spanned the wider rivers himself (eg the Rhine), but his accounts of his war against the Gauls make frequent mention of bridges which happened already to be there, and what's more could be presumed to be there (when planning an attack on a town) which itself indicated that they were rather commonplace by the standards of the day.
  
  When I was in Regensburg there was an excavation underway which showed that the Romans, who did not build a bridge over the Danube at that point, nevertheless used an existing timber structure as the the foundation for their riverside quay. The timber supports projected quite a distance out from the riverbank, suggesting that the previous tenants had either built one of the most ambitious timber bridges in history, or (more likely) had used bridge-building technology of the day to build a long and sturdy pier, possibly used in conjunction with a ferry to cross the river. The advantage would have been that the ferry could thus be laden with more weight and not have to navigate shallows. If this is correct then a similar construction must have been on the other side, and the structure might even have supported crane apparatus for loading and unloading heavy goods and livestock etc.
  
  The point the excavation raised was that a society capable of such technology, when confronted with lesser widths to span, must have done so, and regularly enough to build up expertise.

  Link to this forum: Ancient bridges - or how did they get to the other side then?

  Report message5

• Message 6

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by Backtothedarkplace (U2955180) on Wednesday, 10th June 2009

  Hi priscilla.
  
  Al ot of rivers were dredged out in more recent times so a river that at the time you mention might have been fordable is now impassable by anything other than boat or bridge.
  
  Smaller rivers well streams really could be crossed by things like clapper bridges think of a pavement on legs and you pretty much have it. or stepping stones even.
  
  Theres fords which could be man made and as Nordmann has said in places like Gaul and germany the locals were building sizable timber structures before the romans.
  
  failing that theres ferries but I dont know of a bronze age boat bigger than a sort of large rowing boat handy for foot traffic but maybe not for cargo. they must have either had bigger ones we havent found yet or planned thier routes to use the appropriate route for the cargo orr goods they were carrying ie bales of wool haveto go through a ford to save off loading but a man on foot can use the ferry?

  Link to this forum: Ancient bridges - or how did they get to the other side then?

  Report message6

• Message 7

  , in reply to message 6.

  Posted by MattJ18 (U13798409) on Wednesday, 10th June 2009

  There was a Time Team a while back where they excavated a very old 'bridge' across the Thames. I can't remember if it was pre-Roman or not unfortunately. It consisted of large trunks hammered in to the river bed in pairs with planks laid across them (terrible description - sorry). It struck me as more of a way of making marshland and fords crossable all year round than a way of bridging a large river.

  Link to this forum: Ancient bridges - or how did they get to the other side then?

  Report message7

• Message 8

  , in reply to message 7.

  Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Wednesday, 10th June 2009

  Haha Nordmann you just asked for it (i know you enjoy it)!... tree trunks laid down over the river in the absence of knowledge of swimming or boat construction to permit wetless crossing was no excuse for civilisation when human-meat eating was the norm across most northern Europe... even animals built bridges...
  
  Others had no problem with wetting their feet in the river, they were known to be the most clean people anyway and not needing to mutilate their bodies to keep them "clean", a simple bath was sufficient!

  Link to this forum: Ancient bridges - or how did they get to the other side then?

  Report message8

• Message 9

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by Anglo-Norman (U1965016) on Wednesday, 10th June 2009

  Wed, 10 Jun 2009 17:36 GMT, in reply to priscilla in message 1
  
  One of the oldest stone bridges in Britain may Tarr Steps on Exmoor, a 180 foot, 17-span clapper bridge over the River Barle. It was once high enough for deer to walk under, though the river has since silted up a lot, so that it is now only three feet above the rive. It's age is uncertain but it has been dated to c. 1000BC (though some place it as late as AD1400).
  
  It was, naturally, built by the Devil during a test of strength.

  Link to this forum: Ancient bridges - or how did they get to the other side then?

  Report message9

• Message 10

  , in reply to message 9.

  Posted by priscilla (U1793779) on Wednesday, 10th June 2009

  And wha of pontoon causeways - such as was constructed by Egyptians for Xerxes famous crossing? Would similar have been used to, say, move stock?
  
  Please, E-Nik no digressions into Greeks v Persians on this one.
  
  Tony G. Raised causeways across marsh was surely useful and not solely for cult purposes.... if it was suggested by someone else, I apologise. Cult ritual doubtless had its place but so did the humdrum of staying alive , safe and trading - and we know that trade was an ancient pursuit for necessities - even flint from Norfolk moved far afield.
  
  There may not have been roads, E-Nik but Britain has several ancient routes and tracks across our island. To be honest though I've no checked to see if any crossed rivers.
  
  Regards, P - and thank you all for you input on what is to me a fascinating subject.

  Link to this forum: Ancient bridges - or how did they get to the other side then?

  Report message10

• Message 11

  , in reply to message 10.

  Posted by Anglo-Norman (U1965016) on Wednesday, 10th June 2009

  Wed, 10 Jun 2009 21:54 GMT, in reply to priscilla in message 10
  
  There may not have been roads, E-Nik but Britain has several ancient routes and tracks across our island.Β 
  
  Indeed. Whilst the Romans may be famous for their straight roads, in general these are only the military ones; there are a lot of wiggly Roman roads in Britain, many of which are thought to follow tracks and paths that already existed.

  Link to this forum: Ancient bridges - or how did they get to the other side then?

  Report message11

Back to top